Do stock splits signal future profitability?

This study examines whether stock split announcements contain information content about future profitability, measured in terms of future earnings change, future earnings, or future abnormal earnings. We find that the split announcement year has the highest earnings change and the earnings change declines substantially over the subsequent five years. Our empirical results show little evidence that stock splits are positively related to future profitability. In fact, stock splits are in general negatively related to future profitability in subsequent years after the announcement, except for dividend-paying firms with a split factor less than 0.5. This negative relation holds regardless of future profitability measure. Therefore, our empirical finding suggests that stock splits are not useful signals of a firm’s future earnings prospects. JEL Classification G30     

The valuation effects of stock splits and stock dividends

This study presents evidence which indicates that stock prices, on average, react positively to stock dividend and stock split announcements that are uncontaminated by other contemporaneous firm-specific announcements. In addition, it documents significantly positive excess returns on and around the ex-dates of stock dividends and splits. Both announcement and ex-date returns were found to be larger for stock dividends than for stock splits. While the announcement returns cannot be explained by forecasts of imminent increases in cash dividends, the paper offers several signalling based explanations for them. These are consistent with a cross-sectional analysis of the announcement period returns.     

Irrational investor response to stock splits in an emerging market

Using the creation and collapse of the Cyprus stock market bubble as a backdrop, we document substantial positive abnormal returns around the announcement and execution of stock splits in Cyprus. Split-induced returns cannot be explained by variables proxying for conventional liquidity and signalling hypotheses for stock-split activity. Positive split-induced returns are largely reversed in the post-split months. Post-split stock underperformance is inversely related to, and thus appears to be a correction for, the significant market overreaction at split execution. We suggest an investor irrationality explanation for these results, arguing that stock splits were associated with the creation of the bubble due to the inability of investors to understand splits correctly. We conclude that educating investors in emerging markets to process information correctly will improve the efficiency of such markets.     

Another January effect—Evidence from stock split announcements

This paper examines whether there is a January effect in the propensity and abnormal returns of stock split announcements. It provides primary evidence in the investigation of using monthly effects to explain the patterns of stock splits. The results show that the January effect exists in the likelihood of the occurrence of share splits and in the associated short-term abnormal returns. We also find that another monthly effect—the Halloween effect—exists in stock split announcements. However, the January effect has a much larger and considerably more significant impact on the probability and returns of these announcements. The results of this paper shed light on why we observe patterns in the announcement of corporate events.     

Stock‐Split Post‐Announcement Returns: Underreaction or Market Friction?

We explore the relationship between stock splits and subsequent long‐term returns during the period from 1950 to 2000. We find that, contrary to much previous research, firms do not exhibit positive long‐term post‐split returns. Instead, we find that significant positive returns after the announcement date do not persist after the actual date of the stock split. We also observe that abnormal returns are correlated with the price‐delay or market friction. We conclude that the stock‐split post‐announcement “drift” is only of short duration, and it is attributable to trading frictions rather than behavioral biases.     

Post-split underreaction: The importance of prior split history

The magnitude of the underreaction following a stock split is different depending on the number of splits that have already occurred. The first three splits are followed by abnormal profitability and significant underreaction, which are outcomes consistent with managers using splits to signal favorable information about the firm's prospects. However, abnormal profitability fails to materialize and the underreaction gradually dissipates with each subsequent split suggesting the efficacy of a split announcement as a vehicle to convey information is not constant but steadily reduces with each successive split. The underreaction is distinct from any short-term announcement effects and indicates the market does not immediately impound the split's information content. There is no significant change in liquidity around each consecutive split confirming that the underreaction is not explained by microstructure effects. As is the case with other corporate events, the market interprets the content of announcements already made multiple times differently from announcements made less often.     

The information content of stock splits

We develop a new methodology that controls for both the timing of annual earnings news (Asquith et al., 1989) and the performance prior to split announcements (Barber and Lyon, 1996) to evaluate the information content of stock splits. In contrast to existing evidence, we find that stock splits in aggregate are followed by positive abnormal future earnings growth, suggesting that stock splits contain information about future, rather than past, operating performance. When we use changes in breadth of institutional ownership as a new metric of information content to corroborate our findings, we find that splits with the greatest increase in breadth experience positive post-split abnormal returns and positive abnormal earnings growth. Together, our results suggest that some splits contain positive information about future performance, and that sophisticated market participants such as institutional investors are able to select these splits.     

The information content of stock splits

This study examines whether stock splits contain information content about future operating performance or whether splits are undertaken by firms to realign their share prices and to improve trading liquidity. In the four years following split announcements, splitting firms do not experience improved operating performance relative to non-splitting firms. Furthermore, stock split signals are not related to future profitability. The positive announcement effect can be explained by lower share prices and improved market liquidity following stock splits but not by split signals and post-split operating performance. Our results show very little evidence that stock splits signal improvement in long-run operating performance and are more consistent with the trading range/liquidity hypothesis.     

Mutual Fund Family Size and Mutual Fund Performance: The Role of Regulatory Changes

We examine whether the previously documented positive association between fund family size and fund performance is affected by significant regulatory changes (i.e., Regulation Fair Disclosure (Reg FD), the Global Settlement (GS), and increased scrutiny as a result of trading scandals) that have occurred in the last decade. Using Reg FD as a beginning point for these structural changes, we find that, while fund family size was positively associated with fund performance in the period prior to the regulatory changes, this advantage is significantly weaker in the period subsequent to the regulatory changes. Consistent with the weakened advantage of fund family size in fund performance, we find that the greater stock‐picking skill of larger fund families, measured using the earnings announcement returns of the stocks they trade, also weakened subsequent to the regulatory changes. Using narrower event windows around the regulatory changes, we find that the previously documented superior return of large fund families was partly attributable to selective disclosure. We also find that fund families implicated in the trading scandals experienced a decline in their performance during the scandal period. Finally, we examine the role of large investment banks in providing an advantage to large fund families. Family size was positively associated with the extent to which funds traded in the same direction as forecast revisions by analysts from large investment banks in the period prior to Reg FD and the GS and this association declined significantly after the two regulatory events.     

The Effect Of Stock Splits On Liquidity And Excess Returns: Evidence From Shareholder Ownership Composition

We examine the influence of firm ownership composition on both the abnormal returns at the announcement of a stock split and liquidity changes following a stock split. We find three results. First, the largest post‐split increase in institutional ownership occurs for firms that had low institutional ownership before the split. Second, changes in liquidity are negatively related to the level of institutional ownership before the split. Last, the abnormal return following a split is negatively related to the level of institutional ownership before the split. These findings are important as they shed new light on the source of stock split announcement returns.     

Insider ownership and signals: evidence from stock split announcement effects

This study examines whether investors regard the level of insider ownership of a firm as useful for evaluating stock split decisions. Results show that the abnormal returns at the announcement of stock splits are positively related to the level of insider ownership. The results prevail even after controlling for other relevant factors. Further analysis indicates the positive relation exists for small firms, but not for large firms. This indicates the market evaluates stock split decisions within the context of both insider ownership and information asymmetry.     

Did the 1986 Tax Reform Act Affect Market Reactions to Stock Splits?: A Test of the Tax-Option Hypothesis

This paper tests the prediction of the tax-option hypothesis that the market impact of stock splits would be reduced by the 1986 Tax Reform Act which eliminated the difference between long- and short-term capital gains tax rates. The results show significant excess returns on stock split announcement and ex-days even after 1986. The announcement and ex-day excess returns are similar in different periods before and after the Act. Further, there is no significant relationship between announcement excess returns and increase in returns volatility following splits. These findings are inconsistent with the tax-option hypothesis.     

The Effect of Regulation Fair Disclosure on the Relevance of Conference Calls to Financial Analysts

This study examines the effect of Regulation Fair Disclosure (FD) on the relevance of company-sponsored conference calls. Measuring relevance by a conference call's ability to improve analyst forecast accuracy and consensus, I find larger improvements in both variables during the period surrounding conference calls in the post-FD era versus the pre-FD era. These findings imply that in the post-FD era relatively more about a firm's upcoming earnings becomes known during conference calls, consistent with FD's success in eliminating selective disclosure.     

Return predictability: The dual signaling hypothesis of stock splits

This paper aims to differentiate between optimistic splits and overoptimistic/opportunistic splits. Although markets do not distinguish between these two groups at the split announcement time, optimistic (overoptimistic/opportunistic) splits precede positive (negative) long‐term buy‐and‐hold abnormal returns. Using the calendar month portfolio approach, we show that the zero‐investment, ex ante identifiable, and fully implementable trading strategy proposed in this paper can generate economically and statistically significant positive abnormal returns. Our findings indicate that pre‐split earnings management and how it relates to managers’ incentives, is an omitted variable in the studies of post‐split long‐term abnormal returns.     

Currency devaluation and stock market response: An empirical analysis

We study local stock market reaction to currency devaluation by a country's central bank. Devaluations appear to be anticipated by the local stock markets, and there are significant negative abnormal returns even one year prior to the announcement of the devaluation. A negative trend in stock returns persists for up to one quarter following the first announcement, and then becomes positive thereafter, suggesting a reversal. We explore whether changes in macroeconomic variables prior to currency devaluations are related to abnormal stock returns. We find that stock returns are significantly lower if the devaluation is larger and if the country is a developing nation. Furthermore, stock markets decline more around devaluations if reserves are lower, if the real exchange rate has depreciated over the prior years, if the capital account has declined, if the current account deficit has gone up, or if the country credit rating has deteriorated.     

Stock splits to profit insider trading: Lessons from an emerging market

Stock splits have long presented financial puzzles: Why are they undertaken? Why are they associated with abnormal returns? Abnormal returns, particularly those coming shortly before a split’s announcement date, should raise strong suspicions of insider trading, particularly in nations with weak regulatory structures. We examined the 718 split events in the emerging stock market of Vietnam from 2007 through 2011. We found evidence consistent with illegal insider trading, particularly in firms that were vulnerable to insider manipulation and, therefore, more likely to split their stocks. When vulnerable firms’ stocks did split, they provided significant excess short-term returns. Tellingly, the abnormal returns on those stocks prior to the split announcements were also extremely high, indeed higher than their abnormal post-announcement returns. Moreover, trading volume increased prior to the split announcement date. This suspicious pattern is what we would expect if insiders were trading on their knowledge. We propose that illegal insider trading in contexts where it is possible to escape serious penalty provides a previously undiscussed and cogent explanation for both stock splits and abnormal short-term returns.     

Surprise vs anticipated information announcements: Are prices affected differently? An investigation in the context of stock splits

We compare the long run reaction to anticipated and surprise information announcements using stock splits. Although there is underreaction in both cases, anticipated splits are treated differently to those that are unforeseen. After anticipated splits, cumulative abnormal returns peak at one-and-a-half times the level observed after unanticipated splits although the time taken for the announcement to be absorbed into prices is the same. We explain the difference in underreaction by the degree to which split announcements are believed and hence invested in. The favorable signal conveyed in forecast splits is more credible owing to their better pre-split performance, resulting in a far more pronounced underreaction effect.     

ABNORMAL PERFORMANCE IN SMALL PORTFOLIOS WITH EVENT‐INDUCED VOLATILITY: THE CASE OF STOCK SPLITS

In this article I present a test for detecting abnormal returns when the event analyzed induces volatility and the portfolio is small. The results show that the test is well specified and leads to significant gains in power. I subsequently analyze the abnormal returns around the stock split ex date according to the split factor and find significant abnormal returns only when the factor is greater than 2. The varying motives behind the splits may explain this finding.     

The Efficacy of Regulation Fair Disclosure

This paper examines the impact of Securities and Exchange Commission's Regulation Fair Disclosure (FD) on information leakage around voluntary management disclosures. We find a positive correlation between stock returns two days before and after the voluntary disclosure in the pre‐Regulation FD period, but not in the post‐Regulation FD period. After Regulation FD is implemented, pre‐announcement abnormal return as a percentage of total return decreases by 26.1% (21.4%) for large firms with good (bad) news, suggesting that the amount of information leakage reduces for these firms. These findings provide support for the premise and the intended purpose of the regulation for large firms.     

REIT Stock Splits and Market Efficiency

An analysis of real estate investment trust (REIT) stock splits is presented. Evaluation of the initial reaction to split REITs supports efficient market pricing where REITs generate statistically significant positive announcement date returns, no statistically significant record date returns, and muted ex-date returns. In the long-term, split REITs do not consistently out perform benchmark portfolios over one-year, two-year, and three-year periods. REITs split subsequent to a substantial run up in stock price and to improve the position of their post split stock price relative to the stock price of the typical REIT.